Virgil61

I was going to address these points, especially your first paragraph but thought better of it because I understood the gist of Pertinax's question to be strictly limited to combat effectiveness. The point you make is interesting in that even during a highly intensive campaign like Caesar's there was ample time for rest and recuperation relative to the horrid effects of trench warfare of WWI for example. The only parallel might be if you were part of the defense of a besieged city, even then the intensity would be less day to day I'd imagine.

I went to possibly purchase this much quoted book by Brunt. At over 700 pages, it's only available in hardcover which is fine, but then I saw the price: Italian Manpower 225 B.C.-A.D. 14 $325.00, Oxford University Press!!! Are they insane? Think I'll pass on this one. I hope it's got solid gold lining on the book cover.

Oh this ought to be good...

That's a good question, thankfully I've never had to face or see the modern day equivalent. I know that there are a lot of modern examples from the second world war on units attrited to the point they were non-combat effective. I suspect if the Roman cohort is under the constant pressure of campaigning and a continued process of attrition at some point you'll just have to merge them with another unit. This actually happened to cohorts and even legions who'd been partially destroyed even in the Principate if I remember correctly.

An interesting segue on this question is a comment made by Peter Heather in "The Fall of the Roman Empire". He states at least once and maybe twice, that Illyria was a major recruiting ground for soldiers of the late Roman Army and that the loss of it it may have been on Stilicho's mind as he turned to the Goths to supply forces.

I assume some sort of work-around on the weaponry that allows them to handle effectively, if not then of course they're delegated to some support role. I don't believe in 'cannon fodder' as the only approach. We're stuck with them--I'm not assuming 'vast numbers'--so some sort of approach is needed if you're the Centurion and Minimus the Thumbless shows up to your unit. Even most poorly motivated soldiers given the right training, attention and immersed in a proper environment can be made to perform satisfactory. I can't believe my own insights into soldier training from my own experiences weren't shared to some extent by veteran Roman soldiers. Trust me on this one, when you see the wounded and dead in a battle's aftermath digging ditches or whatever manual labor being done, is cushier than being under fire (or the sword in this case). Edit: I do have to admit Neos I'm an old NCO who has acquired some strong opinions about training and soldier psychology that tend to determine my own approach on these issues.

Well first you're stuck with them in the unit, giving them a 'by' or a nice safer place in the rear will be noticed by other soldiers and resented. This gives other soldiers an idea that screwing up or cowardice is rewarded with a safer outcome. Again, you train them up and you assign some of your best troops to behind them; their choice fight or run into your own unit's swords. It's as much a message to 'good' troops as it is to the thumbless ones and word will tend to get out--don't chop your thumb off or it's the front line for you. Whatever you do you do not form them all into their own unit unless you use shame or punishment as the reason. Isolating them as much as possible from each other's influence, putting them under the direction and training of trusted troops has the additional intangible of peer pressure and shame as a tool. Remember, again, you're stuck with these guys and letting them off to a cushier assignment aint' good for the morale of better soldiers.

That's an interesting question that begs another, just how were they accepted by other soldiers? I can't imagine much confidence by peers or leadership in someone who's actions show them out to be a coward to such an extent they'd chop an appendage off. It points to things being so bad just a warm body would suffice. I'd train them up--assuming a work around on the no-thumb thingy--and put the schmucks right up on the front line the first encounter we had with some sturdy troops right behind them.

Oh,oh...I got exactly the same line-up. (Wouldn't mind Ashley Judd) *Owww*....Hi dear! I was listening to Howard Stern this morning (yes I've got a very healthy degenerate streak) and he was complaining that he got Glenn Close as well.

Looks promising. At least the BBC generally resists the Hollywoodization of its output so hopefully no elephant equivalent of a car chase in this. Love MI5, great show. Wow, peep at me, I'm writing in Ebonics an' didn't know it 'n $h!t... 'Aks' me, ten years on Ft Bragg so I've got a pretty good handle on it.

I just found this; Treasures of Neptune. A History of Fishing in the Roman Empire. (Text in German) 204 p., 71 fig, 8 color plates. Peter Lang, Europ

Roman? Mars and Nike/Victory of course.

I just took the "Who is your celebrity love match" test Well, happy to announce I got Winona Ryder. I'm fine with that. Next closest: Natalie Portman Angelina Jolie Kirsten Dunst

Scum of the Earth. She was on again last night, it tests the limits of my belief in the First Amendment (link for non-Americans).

It's a shame about his stroke, he's got a lot to be proud of though. My grandfatheron my Mom's side was in the Italian army and taken prisoner although I don't know the details. He spent most of his internment at a POW camp in Scotland and wasn't repatriated until 1947.

I finished watching an Italian movie called "El Alamein" filmed a couple of years ago. It tells the story of the battle from the point of view of a young Italian lieutenant who volunteered for combat and the infantry company he's assigned to with the Pavia Infantry division. The film is a bleak look at how the Italian troops were left to fend for themselves by their own commanders and with little resources at their disposal. The battle scenes are decent, not as good as they could be in the sense they probably didn't have the technical resources or budget an American film would've had, but good enough to give a sense of combat. Things are pretty tough on the line, water is in short supply, soldiers have to loot the packs of dead Brits (technically I think Anzacs may have been opposite them) in order to get things like canned fruit, investigate the loss of communication with a Bersagliari scout position and the constant artillery barrages which decimates much of the company's fighting strength. It comes to a head in a final series of defensive battles prior to which much of the more mobile German army retreats leaving the foot infantry like the Pavia and adjacent Folgore Airborne Division on their own. Outnumbered and out gunned the company commander finally tries to lead the remnants of his unit back to the Axis rear through the North African desert. It has excellent cinematography that highlight the starkness of the desert, which is in Morocco and not Egypt where the battle occurred and it won the Italian version of the Academy Awards. I watched it in the original Italian, which wasn't terribly difficult 50% of the time--my Italian is only fair--but I got the gist of most of it. I'm not sure if there is an English sub-titled version out yet but there are Dutch and German ones available. Good stuff if you're interested in El Alamein.

If cornered to make a choice then it would be the whole republican period. At it's idealistic best the Republic set a benchmark for centuries on what a social contract between government and the citizenry should be set up as per Cato's post. At it's worst it showed how human failings could tear those ideals and their implementation apart. Add to that the concurrent expansion and then appearance of Rome as one of the definitive world powers in history and it makes for pretty heady stuff.

I always think of Eastenders, 'Alan Partridge' (hilarious) and Hugh Laurie from Blackadder and Jeeves. Although after watching Laurie with a cranky 'merican accent on House M.D. threw me.

Excellent. They'll take our wisdom and like it!

Full-blooded Italian, parents both Abruzzese (from the province of Abruzzo).

One of my best friends is a prof down at Chapel Hill whose salary just hit the six-figure mark. She's 'living large'; a load of one class per semester (if I remember correctly), research in an area she loves (medical studies), tons of free time. Fifteen years ago she was barely making it day to day in Russia, now she's buying two homes and driving a beemer. Morale of the story I guess is if your're lucky your interests will get you a Phd (she has two believe it or not--long story) in the right fields and work in the right university. Of course there are other important things besides money but it doesn't hurt to get paid well.

Belated Happy Birthday Neos!

Pulling the Italians out of Nasiriyah would be a shame. I've seen them there and they've sent some of their best troops--like the Carabieneri--and done a very good job there.

That's a bit low, but I'll bet it probably takes into account a lot of community-college instructors without Phds. My guess is an archaeologist at a major university with a Phd makes a bit more.

Yes, it was an unusual policy, which I suppose demonstrated his desire to cut Christians out of the mainstream of Roman life. I'm interested to see that Gibbon says (chapter 23), "In all the cities of the Roman world the education of the youth was intrusted to masters of grammar and rhetoric, who were elected by the magistrates, maintained at the public expense, and distinguished by many lucrative and honourable privileges." Forgive my ignorance, but were there really public schools in every Roman city? It seems a very enlightened and modern concept. Julian the Philosopher/Apostate is a fascinating character. His obvious military skill and confidence makes an intriguing contrast with his neo-platonic beliefs, humanity and apparently self-depricating nature. ... Like Marcus Aurelius with a sense of humour What a shame for the Empire that he didn't reign longer or appoint a successor before his death. Years ago I read Gore Vidal's "Julian: A Novel". I remember it being quite vivid and well-written. Vidal takes some liberties, as he had to, but it captured the essence of the times very well.